Not a very nice distinction, but in a competition of cowards the less cowardly win out. What I mean by honest has to do with the Holocaust: quite simply acknowledging that it happened. You have people out there who worship trained killers, members of the S.S. and the S.A. or Brown Shirts, people who would be killers even if their interpretation of events were true. Most of them acknowledge that concentration camps existed, and acknowledge the violence and torture of groups like the Gestapo, even applaud it, but when it comes to the Holocaust itself they suddenly start being on the defensive, as if there was a real break between worshipping the Nazi state in all its aspects and endorsing mass murder. Which is why they're hypocrites, in addition to being racist and violent.
The only post-war Nazi that I've read who doesn't fall into that category is, ironically, a woman by the name of Savitri Devi. She was a European who went to India in the pre-war years and associated with pro-Hitler British and Indian subjects. She converted to Hinduism, married a pro-Nazi Brahmin, and changed her name.
Savitri Devi justifies the Holocaust very succinctly: people in the ancient world always fought wars where the enemy people were eliminated, and the Nazis were fighting against a foe and against a world that had almost beaten their ideals, and so extraordinary measures were required to stop the social decay. And yes extraordinary measures includes waging a war of elimination.
It's not pretty, in fact it's outrageous in that the type of war she talks about is always regarded as being cruel beyond measure, but at least it's better than "the Holocaust didn't really happen."